Hello, fellow evaluators and AEA members! I’m Tasha Parker, Ph.D., LSCSW, MPA, ACHT, Principal and Founder of the Institute of Development. I want to discuss the importance of moving from collaborative and participatory approaches to true reciprocity in evaluation.
As our field has evolved, we’ve recognized the value of including diverse perspectives and local knowledge in our evaluations. However, I believe it’s time to take another steps towards genuine reciprocity with those who have lived experiences of trauma and marginalization.
We must not only include these individuals but create truly reciprocal relationships with them. This shift is crucial for several reasons:
- Healing and Liberation: Acknowledging the expertise of those who have experienced trauma can be healing and liberating.
- Deeper Insights: Reciprocal relationships allow for a more authentic exchange of ideas and experiences.
- Sustainable Change: Reciprocity builds trust and buy-in, essential for implementing and sustaining positive changes.
- Equitable Practice: True reciprocity aligns with principles of equity by redistributing power in the evaluation process.
So, here are some HOT TIPS on how can we move towards reciprocity in our practice? Here are some strategies I’ve been implementing in my work:
- Co-creation from the Start: Involve community members in the evaluation design process from the beginning.
- Skill Exchange: Offer evaluation training to community members while learning from their expertise.
- Shared Decision-Making: Make key decisions collectively with community members.
- Fair Compensation: Compensate community members for their time and expertise.
- Ongoing Relationships: Build long-term relationships beyond individual projects.
- Transparency and Accountability: Be open about the process and create accountability mechanisms.
- Safety and Trust: Prioritize physical and psychological safety in all aspects of the evaluation.
- Cultural, Historical, and Gender Awareness: Address historical contexts, power dynamics, and diverse cultural perspectives throughout the evaluation.
Lessons Learned
Implementing these strategies isn’t always easy. I’ve faced challenges such as institutional resistance and balancing multiple stakeholder interests. However, the benefits in terms of richer data, more meaningful insights, and more impactful recommendations have been well worth the effort.
As we continue to grapple with issues of equity, trauma, and resilience in our evaluations, moving towards true reciprocity is not just beneficial – it’s essential. It aligns our practice with our values and helps ensure that our evaluations contribute to healing, liberating, and positive change.
I encourage all of us to reflect on how we can incorporate reciprocity into our work. Let’s challenge ourselves to go beyond collaboration and participation to create truly reciprocal relationships with those impacted by the programs and policies we evaluate.
What are your thoughts on this shift towards reciprocity? How have you seen trauma, adversity, and chronic stress impact your work as evaluators? I’d love to hear about your experiences and ideas in the comments below.
Remember, like all things, this is a journey, not a destination. It will be messy but the goal is to reduce your imprint of harm along the way. It requires ongoing reflection, learning, and adaptation. But by integrating some of these strategies throughout our evaluation processes, we can create more valid, relevant, and impactful evaluations that truly serve our communities.
Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators. The views and opinions expressed on the AEA365 blog are solely those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the American Evaluation Association, and/or any/all contributors to this site.